H.R. 1030 (The Secret Science Bill)

[SunsetBengal]

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1030


Congress is wanting to force the EPA to show all science and data used to formulate their findings.  The White House says this will restrict the EPA's ability to do their job.

Personally, I feel like the American people have a right to see the information being used to make rulings that effect their lives and wallets.

Quote:Shown Here:
Passed House amended (03/18/2015)
(This measure has not been amended since it was reported to the House on March 2, 2015. The summary of that version is repeated here.)

Secret Science Reform Act of 2015

(Sec. 2) This bill amends the Environmental Research, Development, and Demonstration Authorization Act of 1978 to prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from proposing, finalizing, or disseminating a covered action unless all scientific and technical information relied on to support such action is the best available science, specifically identified, and publicly available in a manner sufficient for independent analysis and substantial reproduction of research results. A covered action includes a risk, exposure, or hazard assessment, criteria document, standard, limitation, regulation, regulatory impact analysis, or guidance. Scientific and technical information includes: (1) materials, data, and associated protocols necessary to understand, assess, and extend conclusions; (2) computer codes and models involved in the creation and analysis of the information; (3) recorded factual materials; and (4) detailed descriptions of how to access and use the information.

This Act may not be construed as requiring the EPA to disseminate scientific and technical information, or superseding any nondiscretionary statutory requirement.

The EPA may not spend more than $1 million per fiscal year on carrying out this Act.

[Belsnickel]

(07-18-2015, 12:02 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1030


Congress is wanting to force the EPA to show all science and data used to formulate their findings.  The White House says this will restrict the EPA's ability to do their job.

Personally, I feel like the American people have a right to see the information being used to make rulings that effect their lives and wallets.

The problem I have with this is who decides on what is the best available science? I think that is the problem at the heart of this bill, because it sounds like the lawmakers want to be the ones making that call. Quite frankly, that is frightening.

[GMDino]

(07-18-2015, 12:02 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/1030


Congress is wanting to force the EPA to show all science and data used to formulate their findings.  The White House says this will restrict the EPA's ability to do their job.

Personally, I feel like the American people have a right to see the information being used to make rulings that effect their lives and wallets.

What difference would it make when they either won't understand or will just ignore it?










Can I see all the info on all the government military contracts with Halliburton?

[BmorePat87]

So the EPA can't use studies that don't disclose some information (to protect the privacy of subjects) and industries (oil, coal, etc) will be able to sue to have their hired scientists go through this information, delaying regulations that protect us and the environment but cost these industries more?

So basically this is about wasting more money by letting the energy industry delay regulations and have scientists they pay look through studies that are already peer reviewed. Throw on a fancy name and pretend like the goal is to save taxpayers money, not the corporations?

[BmorePat87]

(07-18-2015, 12:23 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The problem I have with this is who decides on what is the best available science? I think that is the problem at the heart of this bill, because it sounds like the lawmakers want to be the ones making that call. Quite frankly, that is frightening.

The energy industry would get to have their hired teams go through it and then have legal challenges to any study.

http://news.sciencemag.org/environment/2015/03/house-approves-epa-secret-science-bills-despite-white-house-veto-threat

[Belsnickel]

(07-18-2015, 12:34 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The energy industry would get to have their hired teams go through it and then have legal challenges to any study.

http://news.sciencemag.org/environment/2015/03/house-approves-epa-secret-science-bills-despite-white-house-veto-threat

So this is a bill about increasing bureaucracy in an effort to allow special interest groups to have an even larger impact on the regulations intended to protect the general public from them just running roughshod over us? Sounds like a great deal to me.

[GMDino]

(07-18-2015, 12:34 PM)BmorePat87 Wrote: The energy industry would get to have their hired teams go through it and then have legal challenges to any study.

http://news.sciencemag.org/environment/2015/03/house-approves-epa-secret-science-bills-despite-white-house-veto-threat

(07-18-2015, 12:37 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: So this is a bill about increasing bureaucracy in an effort to allow special interest groups to have an even larger impact on the regulations intended to protect the general public from them just running roughshod over us? Sounds like a great deal to me.

Well the GOP has always been against big government.

[Rotobeast]

(07-18-2015, 12:31 PM)GMDino Wrote: What difference would it make when they either won't understand or will just ignore it?










Can I see all the info on all the government military contracts with Halliburton?

Interesting that there is an "R" next to each of those fellow's names.
I guess it would be redundant to put up any with a "D", as it's generally Biden who dominates the category.

[GMDino]

(07-18-2015, 12:40 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Interesting that there is an "R" next to each of those fellow's names.
I guess it would be redundant to put up any with a "D", as it's generally Biden who dominates the category.

Well they are the ones on the committee who don't understand how science works.

I'll see if I can find any Democrats!

Edit: Found the list...n ow I need to see how many are rejecting science!

https://science.house.gov/about/membership

[StLucieBengal]

(07-18-2015, 12:23 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: The problem I have with this is who decides on what is the best available science? I think that is the problem at the heart of this bill, because it sounds like the lawmakers want to be the ones making that call. Quite frankly, that is frightening.

I agree with this.... But that cuts both ways.

When their models don't pan out they change the figures or the name to keep the money flowing.

One way or another I would some consistency in the testing. And let it show one way or the other. Without manipulation.

[SunsetBengal]

Let's not forget that most Scientists in Academia, survive off of government grants.  Of course they are going to find whatever the administration wants them to find...

[Belsnickel]

(07-18-2015, 04:46 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: Let's not forget that most Scientists in Academia, survive off of government grants.  Of course they are going to find whatever the administration wants them to find...

And the scientists that will be coming from the industry special interest groups will find whatever their employers want them to find. So we make what you likely see as a waste of taxpayer money becoming an even larger waste of taxpayer money as we allow the wolves to guard the flock.

[SunsetBengal]

(07-18-2015, 04:53 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: And the scientists that will be coming from the industry special interest groups will find whatever their employers want them to find. So we make what you likely see as a waste of taxpayer money becoming an even larger waste of taxpayer money as we allow the wolves to guard the flock.

When it comes to these EPA regulations, it cost people jobs, consumers pay more for services.

As far as impact on the global climate scene;  What are other industrialized Nations doing?  If only the US penalizes companies, and forces its citizens to use more expensive energy sources, doesn't that really impact the economy in a negative way, while only making just a drop in the global "bucket" of pollution?

[StLucieBengal]

(07-18-2015, 04:53 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: And the scientists that will be coming from the industry special interest groups will find whatever their employers want them to find. So we make what you likely see as a waste of taxpayer money becoming an even larger waste of taxpayer money as we allow the wolves to guard the flock.

So your making the case for the EPA to not be invoved either. They have a vested policital interest in the findings. According to you, no one can be trusted.... Which I agree

[Nebuchadnezzar]

Do you want to take their word for it or would your like to know how they came to that conclusion?

The EPA has been saying "Because we say so" for far to long. Let others run their numbers and come to their own conclusions. "Because we say so" just isn't good enough.

[StLucieBengal]

I'm ok with then opening their books. I wanna see it all. If it's a real thing then they would have no problem showing their work.

[GMDino]

(07-18-2015, 06:01 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: When it comes to these EPA regulations, it cost people jobs, consumers pay more for services.

As far as impact on the global climate scene;  What are other industrialized Nations doing?  If only the US penalizes companies, and forces its citizens to use more expensive energy sources, doesn't that really impact the economy in a negative way, while only making just a drop in the global "bucket" of pollution?

Ah yes!  Having clean and water will cost money!  Valuable money we can eat and breath when the air and water goes bad!  

[GMDino]

(07-18-2015, 06:42 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I'm ok with then opening their books.   I wanna see it all.   If it's a real thing then they would have no problem showing their work.

And how would YOU know?  Have you dedicated your life to science? 

[Belsnickel]

(07-18-2015, 06:01 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: When it comes to these EPA regulations, it cost people jobs, consumers pay more for services.

As far as impact on the global climate scene;  What are other industrialized Nations doing?  If only the US penalizes companies, and forces its citizens to use more expensive energy sources, doesn't that really impact the economy in a negative way, while only making just a drop in the global "bucket" of pollution?

None of these are valid excuses to allow special interest groups to manipulate data, which is what would happen.

(07-18-2015, 06:42 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I'm ok with then opening their books. I wanna see it all. If it's a real thing then they would have no problem showing their work.

EPA regulations should be based on scientific findings that are peer reviewed. And most of them are. The problem is that some people that don't necessarily understand the scientific method or how to interpret the data don't like the findings and so rely on a minority of people that do have credentials in a vaguely related field (or one that just sounds similar) to present some contrary evidence for a straw man attack.

[SunsetBengal]

(07-18-2015, 07:27 PM)GMDino Wrote: Ah yes!  Having clean and water will cost money!  Valuable money we can eat and breath when the air and water goes bad!  

All they're looking for here, is transparency.  You know, one of the items that B.H. Obama ran his campaign on...